Lefant M310 Ultra VS Lefant M330 Pro

Both the Lefant M310 Ultra and Lefant M330 Pro share a strong common foundation in this category: identical 60 dB operating noise, the same 280 mm diameter footprint, dual smart-home compatibility with both Google Assistant and Alexa, and equivalent filtration setups including a HEPA and allergy filter — making both suitable for allergy-sensitive households. A one-year warranty applies to each, so neither has a support edge out of the box.

The most meaningful divergence lies in physical dimensions. The M310 Ultra stands just 79 mm tall versus the M330 Pro's 95 mm, a 16 mm difference that translates directly into under-furniture reach — the M310 Ultra is significantly more likely to slip beneath low-clearance sofas and beds without manual lifting. This also contributes to its notably smaller overall volume (6,193.6 cm³ vs 7,448 cm³), making it a more compact machine overall. The M330 Pro is also heavier at 3,310 g compared to 3,020 g, though for a robot vacuum this weight difference has minimal day-to-day impact since the unit moves autonomously.

In this spec group, the M310 Ultra holds a clear edge for homes with low furniture, thanks to its slimmer profile. If under-furniture clearance is not a concern, the two robots are otherwise evenly matched across every other general specification listed here.

Across every single feature in this group, the Lefant M310 Ultra and Lefant M330 Pro are a perfect match — there is not one differentiating spec between them. Both offer a capable autonomous cleaning toolkit: mapping with route planning, no-go zones, problem-area cleaning, carpet detection, and reliable anti-fall and obstacle sensors. For day-to-day use, this means both robots can intelligently navigate a home, avoid drops and furniture, and be directed to focus on specific trouble spots without user intervention.

A few notable absences apply equally to both models. Neither supports self-emptying, meaning the dustbin requires manual emptying after each session — a consideration for larger homes or less frequent maintenance routines. Both also lack mopping capability entirely (no mop cleaning, raising, or drying), so users needing wet-floor cleaning will need a separate solution. The absence of virtual barrier support is worth flagging too; while no-go zones drawn via the app serve a similar purpose, physical virtual barriers offer a hardware-level fallback that neither unit provides.

Since the feature sets are completely identical, this group results in a dead tie. The choice between the M310 Ultra and M330 Pro cannot be informed by features alone — buyers should weigh the differences found in other specification groups instead.

Design-wise, these two robots are nearly identical — both use bagless dustbins, feature twin side brushes for edge cleaning, and lack both a display and automatic height adjustment. The twin-brush configuration is worth noting as a shared advantage: it improves debris sweep-in from both sides simultaneously, which is particularly effective along walls and in corners compared to single-brush designs.

The only design spec that separates them is dustbin capacity: the M310 Ultra holds 0.5 l versus the M330 Pro's 0.45 l. In practical terms, a 50 ml difference is modest — roughly equivalent to a few extra tablespoons of debris — and is unlikely to meaningfully change how often either bin needs emptying in most households. On a single cleaning run, both bins should perform comparably for small to medium-sized spaces.

The M310 Ultra holds a narrow edge here on dustbin capacity, but it is a minor real-world advantage at best. For most users, this spec group will not be a deciding factor between the two models.

Suction power is where these two models part ways most meaningfully. The M310 Ultra delivers 6,000 Pa versus the M330 Pro's 5,000 Pa — a 20% increase in rated suction. In real-world terms, higher Pascal ratings translate to more effective pickup of fine dust, pet hair embedded in carpet fibers, and heavier debris like cereal or kitty litter. For households with thick rugs, pets, or high-traffic areas, that extra pulling force can make a tangible difference in cleaning thoroughness per pass.

Everything else in this category is evenly matched. Both robots offer 5 cleaning modes, handle all floor types, and include mopping — notable given that the Features group showed mopping listed as absent; the data here indicates both do in fact mop. Neither unit includes a dirt sensor, electrostatic filtration, or UV sanitization, so neither has an edge in detecting or neutralizing biological contaminants beyond standard filtration.

For cleaning power, the M310 Ultra has a clear advantage thanks to its higher suction rating. Users who prioritize deep-clean performance on carpets or deal with persistent pet hair will find the extra 1,000 Pa a meaningful step up over the M330 Pro.

Starting from an identical foundation — a 2,600 mAh battery, 4-hour charge time, auto-off functionality, and no removable battery on either unit — the key divergence here is runtime. The M310 Ultra runs for 170 minutes per charge while the M330 Pro manages 150 minutes, a 20-minute gap drawn from the same capacity battery. This suggests the M310 Ultra is more energy-efficient in operation, squeezing more cleaning time out of identical hardware.

In practical terms, 20 extra minutes is meaningful. At typical robot vacuum coverage rates, that difference can translate to several hundred additional square feet per cycle — enough to matter in larger homes or open floor plans where the M330 Pro might require a mid-clean recharge that the M310 Ultra could avoid entirely. Neither model supports a removable battery, so runtime efficiency is all the more important since swapping in a spare is not an option.

The M310 Ultra takes the edge in this group: same battery, same charge time, but noticeably longer operational coverage. For users with larger spaces or who prefer uninterrupted cleaning cycles, this runtime advantage reinforces the M310 Ultra as the stronger performer.